Martin hands down. This Taylor is one of the best I've heard, but it doesn't have the warmth and woody tone that the martin has. Taylor sounds too bright and tinny for my ears. Both great guitars tho! Anyone would be happy to have either one
TOO bright and tinny? TOO BRIGHT AND TINNY? I can get that Taylor is brighter, but if you find it TOO bright and tinny. . . you have a big problem with your hearing.
This guy makes the best guitar reviews .. I feel sorry for the people who give this a thumbs down. Some people just go through life being angry little tards
Guitar center sells one called the D16 Special. It has the full size D body depth. Basically a HD28 with a satin finish and less bling so it cost less. 1800 bucks for a new one. I bought a used one for 1k. Also made in Nazareth PA The D16E has a ooo body depth. The D16 special is full size
Logan Payne I have 5 Taylors and two (formerly 3)Martins. I traded my DCPA 4 for a Gibson J-200. Both Taylor and Martins have their own advantages and unique "sound."
You sure are honest. Via these youtudes I decided to get 16GT based on what my ears like. dont mean i dont want a 414 coz it sounds awesome too : ) i think they are like benz vx bmw, they are GREAT. i think some songs may sound better on one or the other....
My thought is Martin for recording Taylor for stage. In a strum Martin sounds muddy to me Taylor you can hear each string Taylor would cut through the mix on stage.
i have a Martin D16 , and just WOOOAW , this guitare is increadible , low bass , and clearer ! I love this guitare ( I m french sry for my english =) )
Really great example of how these brands sound. Taylor has the nice bright clear tone but the martin has that classic warm "martin" sound. I love them both!
I own a cutaway version of each of these guitars. Each is beautiful in its own way. Both have new strings. The 310 is from 2003, the finish has darkened, the wood has opened up, the tone is rich. The Martin is from 2014, the tone is deeper. The Taylor is set up to be a bit easier to play, but the Martin string height helps with volume and overtones. I can't say which I like better, but I do feel very fortunate to have both.
I just got me a used Taylor 314ce from a buddy of mine. I'm in love with the sustain, clarity, and the frequency range of the instrument. The frequency is almost piano like in the highs and the bass register. Taylor for me!
I played both of these about 3 months ago when looking for something to make a step up from a Big Baby. Both of them sounded good when fingerpicked. When strummed, the Martin was smooth, balanced, kind of "woody." But the brightness of the 310's upper registers made it seem like the strings were fighting each other when strummed. Kind of harsh when you strum it for an extended period. Was a fairly easy decision.
...I sat in a music store recently and played a bunch of guitars for hours before narrowing my search to a Taylor 314CE and a Martin D16RGT...while the 314CE is a Grand Auditorium body and not a dreadnought, the distinctive Taylor sound is still there...every time I picked up the Martin, I said to myself "this is the one for me"...then I'd grab the Taylor, play for a bit and say "I think THIS is the one for me"...this went on for two whole hours (when I finally came up from the soundproof room in the basement of the store, the clerk looked at me and said "You're still here, I thought you had gone home") before finally deciding on the Taylor for many reasons, mainly ease of play and the electric-acoustic sound, which was fantastic...if the Martin had been an electric-acoustic, I probably would have went for it's more balanced, yet mellow tone and lightning fast, electric guitar-like action...really, really hard choice...so much so, I'm looking for a used D16RGT to put a Fishman pickup in and use for some of the harder strum songs we are playing...you really can't go wrong with either...
The D-16RTG has the same body depth as a 00 or 000. So it's not a true dreadnought. It makes a big difference. You may have well just been playing a 00 or 000.
Martin wins with strong yet clear and balanced sound; Taylor is strong but middle register overpowers lower end, and the upper register is overly bright.
I'm probably wrong but as a primarily electric player I'm getting the gist that Martin acoustics have a more Les paul type of deal and Taylor is more like a strat. What I mean by that is Martins seems to have a deeper, warmer sound to them where as Taylors are brighter.
After owning both guitars I would pick the Martin every time. The Taylor is a great guitar for the money and is a great guitar overall. However, I personally like the Martin better because it seems to carry that true vintage Martin sound. The Martin has a great earthy tone that isn't found on the Taylor. And the Martin has over 180 years of craftsmanship behind its name. Ultimately, between these two it really comes down to preference. I just like the Martin!
Joshua Henderson Josh: I'm less than comfortable with the Martin due to it's use of synthetic materials for the bridge and fingerboard. I admit it sounds fantastic, though. I want my acoustics made of wood AND to sound good..apparently it's not possible at this price point.
LarryRickenbacker Larry: Look up the Martin DSR, D15M, and 00015M. Each of these are made of solid wood with no richlite and all of them sound fantastic.
LarryRickenbacker I agree Larry. I wish my D-16 was made of all solid wood. However; I have found that the richlite material to be very close in tone to the solid Black Ebony that is found on my D-28. If you can get over the fact that it's partially synthetic and not wood then you'll end up with a great guitar for the $. I bought my 16 as a "workhorse" guitar anyway. So I'm not too worried about it being all wood.
If it sounds good and feels good and you get the gig done and get paid it doesn't matter if the fretboard is made of Hyena crap! Ultimately a guitar is just a tool to help you be a conduit of good music. It's not something to fetish.... ;)
Martin FTW! I have nothing but respect for Taylor (those bright, bright, loud Taylors) but the Martin blows it out of the water, which is fitting since it's a dreadnought! Taylor Grand Auditorium vs a Martin Grand Performance would be a much closer competition (hint hint).
The Martin sounds like the body is a mile deep, whereas, the Taylor sounds very shallow. It's their trademark sounds! Cant go wrong with either. My personal preference from this vid is the Martin, w/o question!
Did a test on a martin D-16 recently and was blown away with the first strum. It is an insane guitar! Damned near bought it, but opted for a Gibson Les Paul Japan Limited edition instead. I think the D-16 is next tho. Check it out and hear it for yourself if you haven't already done so.
I've listened to the comparison about half a dozen times now, and I have to give the nod to maple walnut ice cream over butter pecan. The rich, classical taste of maple walnut is clearly superior in form and function to the warmth and smoothness of butter pecan.
I ran across this channel when I searched for Taylor guitars, and you know what? As far as I know, Tony is the only person anywhere who'll do us the very simple service of comparing guitar tone right in front of us, side by side- two guitars, so we can actually hear how they compare. You know, instead of reading descriptions of their tone- which is useless. It's a great idea and I appreciate it, Tony. Now, then...off to rob a bank..
The Martin was much more pleasant to listen to, and by the end of the video, although I like brightness, I was beginning to get ear fatigue from the Taylor's sharp tinniness. If you're a singer-songwriter, you want the rich, smooth Martin backing you up.
The Taylor sounds like it's coming through a tube that accentuates the higher end of the midrange a little too much. The Martin has a far more "true" flat warm chorusy sounding tone. I would want my guitar to be flat in the studio because it's easier to EQ into a sound than it is to EQ parts out of it.
The part of the video that I found most telling was when he was just strumming chords. The Martin sounded clear and full. The Taylor sounded too strong in the mids which muddled up the sound a bit
I appreciate your reviews. It's amazing the different tones that are out there. You really need to understand what you want, and the price range that you are looking in. I leaned towards the Martin. Seems like the harmonics were more even throughout, where the Talyor leaned a little more on the higher end brightness.
The D-16 sounds better to my ears, there is just that Richlite thing that annoys me a little to be true. I would understand the use of this material on a cheaper guitar though.
Philip Deppen Maybe check yours? I don’t see any errors. If you’re referring to the “your” that’s intentionally possessive. Like your english isn’t good. Your phone is ringing. You’re is meant to be used in place of you are. Like you’re a fucking idiot and you revealed it by thinking I misspelled correctly spelled words. Meaning those are words you regularly misspell. Turn autocorrect back on bud it might teach you something.
@@HeiTheDarkReaper Ha! Great comeback. He may have been referring to your use of of the word "English," which should have been capitalized. I'm not sure anymore, but back when I was a kid in school improper capitalization constituted a misspelled word on the test. It really doesn't matter here though. You and Philip Deppen both communicate wonderfully. A writer once said, "Language is the skin of thought." And that's the beauty of a forum such as this. We can truly convey our thoughts and feelings in a common meeting place populated by people who are passionate about Martin and Taylor guitars.
I've played plenty of both & let's face it both have their own distinct sound. Some people like Taylor some people prefer Martin. I always wished Taylor could make a guitar that sounds more like a D28, not going to happen
The taylor has that brighter taylor sound but it also surprised me with the low end it still had! the martin has that classic martin sound very very WARM! the taylor would definitely sound better if you were a solo artist or in a more contemporary band, but if you're in a folk band i would go with the martin because it wouldn't stick out. but i do have to say i still think the taylor 320, that has the tropical mahogany top, would sound better than this particular martin in my opinion. That's just because i love how Tropical mahogany and sapele sound when put on the same guitar!
Strumming lightly (3:39)really shows the balance of the Martin. The Taylor leans toward a slightly more bottom and top tone with both being a little punchier. I had a 310 CE which I still miss. Shopping right now. Considering a Martin or a Larrivee' for something different than what I had.
A couple years ago Alanis Morissette played a televised awards show. The man running front of house said she played a Taylor and there were 2 Martins onstage as well. He said the Taylor's are so bright and in this case ruining the high hats in the mix so they had to mute Alanis. Go figure. I like Martin.
Two great guitars to be fair, but for me the Martin D16 is such an underrated guitar its crazy. You really get a lot of punch and bass and the guitar feel great to play, like the whole thing is vibrating like crazy. That being said the Taylor is a very good option, if you prefer that kind of sound. Sounds great as well. In a band setting I might go for the Taylor, and Ive been a long time Martin purist. But Im always open for new sonic sensations.
The Martin wins for sound in my book. Perfectly balanced whereas the Taylor mid is dominant and tamps the highs and lows because. But ebony fingerboard? That's a better piece of wood to make contact with.
Just listening, the Martin seems to have a more balanced sound, the Taylor has more midrange wonk to it. Not bad, mind you, just not as clear and level as the Martin, which has a more natural sound. The Taylor sounds a bit colored in tone.
agreed. martin sounds smooth, warm, earthy, balanced and natural. taylor is more spicey, colored, resonant, a bit boomy, with better highs, but not necessary bad, some do like it. the chap who mentioned about the equalsier has a good point. i have a martin 16, but want a 414 as well.
I think the Taylor is more balanced and clear. The Martin is more boomy and muted. Depends on what you like. I own a 310 and it is very versatile. It also has plenty of bass and I enjoy fingerstyle on it - enough that I sold my 314.
Hmmm, I wouldn't turn either Guitar down as far as ownership but I kinda like the tone of the Martin a bit better over the Taylor...Thanks for the comparison..
That's a close call which of these guitars is the winner. They both have the sound characteristics that Martin and Taylor are known for. I still prefer the Martin sound, but I do love the midrange of that Taylor. Maybe if I had the money I'd buy both of them, LOL.
thanks for the demo. iv been enjoying them. i really like my martin D16 RGT. almost went with the mahogany model. however, the rosewood model just sounded the best to my ears that day. i say find a acoustic guitar you like, and spend more time playing.. if you do this.. i bet regardless of what brand you end up buying./ you spend a few hours a day with her you will make her sound as good as she is gonna ever sound. how can you not if are practicing more. i think i want a ceder top for my next acoustic. i really am digging ceder and how well it goes with finger picking. but all maple sounds good too. sigh, i guess its ok to just buy the martin and the taylor.. no problem then. laughs.never know what guitar may inspire you that day, so options are ok i think. rock on.
Martin wins on the Dred body style and sound, it's classic. Taylor has other designs that I do like, like the GA or 14 series, and the really big GO body they just came out with. I really like what Andy Taylor has done for them as far as design and sound. Both companies make great guitars.
Mike Amar The d-16 is not 1,949. Even the rgt is only up to $1850. Which is alot considering what I got mine for 10 years ago new. But the GT is like 1650 or something now.
This is now the second comparison I have to give to the Taylor. Its both deep and loud, which is what all bluegrass players want. I own 3 Martins now, but if I had to go and pick one of just those two to buy, I would take the Taylor without hesitation.
Yes way. The Martins I own are much better than the D-16. I have an HD-28 and a D-42. If I had to choose between my Martins and ANY Taylor, I would pick both of my Martins. I was just commenting on the two he compared in the video. Also, each guitar, even of the same make and model will sound different.
pickin4you I own a d-16rgt. No Taylor in its price range can touch it. And I don't hear this one touching the gt either. Is it my best Martin? Hell no. That would be my D Mahogany. It's a D-18ge with alpine Swiss top and bracing. Puts the GE away no problem. And all the wood is certified including the Honduras mahogany neck back and sides. No select wood neck here. And that guitar will bury any Taylor I've ever heard. All Taylor's. Oh BTW it was 1000 less the the GEs up to the point of being discontinued in 2013. Only 132 over 4 years made. A 5000 dollar Taylor can't touch it. And honestly I can't find one new Martin that does except the 18 authentic. Only one that edges it out. It's the rosewood lovers mahogany. Just a beast. Look into btw if you haven't heard of it. Might be the best kept secret in Martin history. Was called the D mahogany 09, in 2009 when it came out, and changed to D mahogany from 2010-2013. Only Martin ever made with Swiss alpine spruce bracing. They made almost no profit on it because they charged so little and it's higher quality then a GE. They also never changed the spec sheet to Golden era bracing, which it is. Including the side cloth strips. And that hurt the sales too. There are probably about 2 left in the world still new old stock for sale. Anyway I'm sorry, back on point. The point is most Taylor's are good, and you don't find duds really, but none are amazing. None have that Martin wow when you find the one. That 16GT he's playing is while it's not top of the line still has that Martin soul, roundness, percussion and richness. Still has some wow factor even as an entry level. The Taylor once again sounds like all Taylor's. And that's not a good thing. Sounds 2 inches deep and the midrange gets all mashed together in brightness. Thee Martin sounds twice its size. And with all due respect don't discount the 16s. I own 16rgt and also high end Martin's. Once that 16 opens up its a beast for the money. Mines 8 years old. Is it as good my brand new d mahogany? No. But not many things are, brand new. The d mahogany is just an amazing new out of the box sounding guitar (Swiss spruce) . However I'll put that aged 16 with replaced ivory saddle and nut against a new d28 any day and it will definitely hold its own against a new hd28. I'll never sell my 16rgt. It's a gray rosewood guitar and I put to main into it. They're good guitars and they nailed it with that hybrid bracing on that thing, whether it was on purpose or not. It Just works. Good talking to ya. Very surprised you prefer the Taylor here.
Fantastic demo and insightful comments from the exprienced. I decided on a Martin GT16 over a 414 that I was looking at...i think i prefer that warmer mids, soulful sound. i tried the 214CE and really love it, lively, but i think a bit bright for my taste of music. I heard the 414 would be better for singing along though...cant have everything in life all at once. if $ permits, i love to have a taylor one day as well. Altho a refined Lakewood would be a dream. thanks
Martin hands down. Big noticeable difference at 3:17, 3:32 and 3:37 with pick, Martin more rich and BALANCED low to high with definitely sweeter highs Taylor was more mid pronounced and thinner tone.
That's not an easy question... The playability can vary with the setup of the guitar, what style you play and your experience level. Taylor's are known for their great playability though....
The Martin sounds better to my ears in this test. But there was not a word about what strings were on each guitar - which makes as much difference as who made them.
going through whatever recording configuration you're using and coming out of my trusty delta 66 and omni i/o and rokit 6 monitors, I sense more crispness and definition from the Martin and more pronounced mids but less crisp from the Taylor. If it's any indication of my personal preference (it is!), I own 2 Martins and no Taylors.
Am so happy I found this video!! I have a Martin D16GT, bought in NY from guitar center. Obviously sounds much better than the Taylor :) Now I’m wondering which guitar should I get for a step up...
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
I really like how this video was setup/editted. It makes it much easier to discern the differences.
Haven't seen a quality video quite like it.
u can make it if u want its easy
Martin hands down. This Taylor is one of the best I've heard, but it doesn't have the warmth and woody tone that the martin has. Taylor sounds too bright and tinny for my ears. Both great guitars tho! Anyone would be happy to have either one
JayValorMusic I agree!
TOO bright and tinny? TOO BRIGHT AND TINNY? I can get that Taylor is brighter, but if you find it TOO bright and tinny. . . you have a big problem with your hearing.
Some songs sound better with the brightness of the Taylor.
Each has it's own distinctive sound, but I like them both. To hell with feeding the kids; I'll get one of each.
Andrew Reedman I agree. one of each please..lol
Andrew Reedman
Lmao I laughed so hard
With a Martin, you hear the wood. With a Taylor, you hear the strings.
stigmajosh
No hay pedo! We get the idea.
Mmm, no.
That's what I found out about a Taylor and a Martin too.
Whoever said this didn't know they make more than one string.
yes and that's the most important part. The wood. If you want to hear the strings play a plywood/laminte axe.
The Martin sounds fantastic, and is my pick of the two.
This guy makes the best guitar reviews .. I feel sorry for the people who give this a thumbs down. Some people just go through life being angry little tards
Martin...softer ,warmer, sound ...a guitar with class and history...I love all 27 of mine and my 4 Taylor's ...
Guitar center sells one called the D16 Special. It has the full size D body depth. Basically a HD28 with a satin finish and less bling so it cost less. 1800 bucks for a new one. I bought a used one for 1k. Also made in Nazareth PA
The D16E has a ooo body depth. The D16 special is full size
I am a taylor guy, I own two. In this comparison I like the martin much better tho.
Logan Payne I have 5 Taylors and two (formerly 3)Martins. I traded my DCPA 4 for a Gibson J-200. Both Taylor and Martins have their own advantages and unique "sound."
You sure are honest. Via these youtudes I decided to get 16GT based on what my ears like. dont mean i dont want a 414 coz it sounds awesome too : ) i think they are like benz vx bmw, they are GREAT. i think some songs may sound better on one or the other....
My thought is Martin for recording Taylor for stage. In a strum Martin sounds muddy to me Taylor you can hear each string Taylor would cut through the mix on stage.
i have a Martin D16 , and just WOOOAW , this guitare is increadible , low bass , and clearer ! I love this guitare ( I m french sry for my english =) )
Really great example of how these brands sound. Taylor has the nice bright clear tone but the martin has that classic warm "martin" sound. I love them both!
Best comparison video I’ve ever seen! Thank you!
Listened several times. I like the Martin.
I own a cutaway version of each of these guitars. Each is beautiful in its own way. Both have new strings. The 310 is from 2003, the finish has darkened, the wood has opened up, the tone is rich. The Martin is from 2014, the tone is deeper. The Taylor is set up to be a bit easier to play, but the Martin string height helps with volume and overtones. I can't say which I like better, but I do feel very fortunate to have both.
This is the right answer, yes
I just got me a used Taylor 314ce from a buddy of mine. I'm in love with the sustain, clarity, and the frequency range of the instrument. The frequency is almost piano like in the highs and the bass register. Taylor for me!
Just my opinion but the Martin D16 wins .
I played both of these about 3 months ago when looking for something to make a step up from a Big Baby. Both of them sounded good when fingerpicked. When strummed, the Martin was smooth, balanced, kind of "woody." But the brightness of the 310's upper registers made it seem like the strings were fighting each other when strummed. Kind of harsh when you strum it for an extended period. Was a fairly easy decision.
...I sat in a music store recently and played a bunch of guitars for hours before narrowing my search to a Taylor 314CE and a Martin D16RGT...while the 314CE is a Grand Auditorium body and not a dreadnought, the distinctive Taylor sound is still there...every time I picked up the Martin, I said to myself "this is the one for me"...then I'd grab the Taylor, play for a bit and say "I think THIS is the one for me"...this went on for two whole hours (when I finally came up from the soundproof room in the basement of the store, the clerk looked at me and said "You're still here, I thought you had gone home") before finally deciding on the Taylor for many reasons, mainly ease of play and the electric-acoustic sound, which was fantastic...if the Martin had been an electric-acoustic, I probably would have went for it's more balanced, yet mellow tone and lightning fast, electric guitar-like action...really, really hard choice...so much so, I'm looking for a used D16RGT to put a Fishman pickup in and use for some of the harder strum songs we are playing...you really can't go wrong with either...
The D-16RTG has the same body depth as a 00 or 000. So it's not a true dreadnought. It makes a big difference. You may have well just been playing a 00 or 000.
your comparison videos are priceless. thank you so much guys
Martin wins with strong yet clear and balanced sound; Taylor is strong but middle register overpowers lower end, and the upper register is overly bright.
I had a 310 years ago and liked it, but my Martin D16GT has the woody voice and great sustain that I like. It’s also well balanced across the strings.
Martin is simply the best hands down
I'm probably wrong but as a primarily electric player I'm getting the gist that Martin acoustics have a more Les paul type of deal and Taylor is more like a strat. What I mean by that is Martins seems to have a deeper, warmer sound to them where as Taylors are brighter.
Agreed
I've heard the same myself.
Well said
Exactly my thoughts too and just like my Tele I prefer the Taylor
You're not wrong. I'm more into Taylor/Strat than Martin/LP, but certain Taylor guitars have a lot of depth as well.
I like them both!! I think you would make a great choice with either one!
wow very impressive both have their distinct tone and sustain..but im always going with the martin..:)
That Martin knocked the hell out of that Taylor, boy let me tell yah!
After owning both guitars I would pick the Martin every time. The Taylor is a great guitar for the money and is a great guitar overall. However, I personally like the Martin better because it seems to carry that true vintage Martin sound. The Martin has a great earthy tone that isn't found on the Taylor. And the Martin has over 180 years of craftsmanship behind its name. Ultimately, between these two it really comes down to preference. I just like the Martin!
Joshua Henderson Josh: I'm less than comfortable with the Martin due to it's use of synthetic materials for the bridge and fingerboard. I admit it sounds fantastic, though. I want my acoustics made of wood AND to sound good..apparently it's not possible at this price point.
LarryRickenbacker Larry: Look up the Martin DSR, D15M, and 00015M. Each of these are made of solid wood with no richlite and all of them sound fantastic.
LarryRickenbacker I agree Larry. I wish my D-16 was made of all solid wood. However; I have found that the richlite material to be very close in tone to the solid Black Ebony that is found on my D-28. If you can get over the fact that it's partially synthetic and not wood then you'll end up with a great guitar for the $. I bought my 16 as a "workhorse" guitar anyway. So I'm not too worried about it being all wood.
Joshua Henderson Glad you love your Martin, Joshua!
If it sounds good and feels good and you get the gig done and get paid it doesn't matter if the fretboard is made of Hyena crap! Ultimately a guitar is just a tool to help you be a conduit of good music. It's not something to fetish.... ;)
Martin FTW! I have nothing but respect for Taylor (those bright, bright, loud Taylors) but the Martin blows it out of the water, which is fitting since it's a dreadnought! Taylor Grand Auditorium vs a Martin Grand Performance would be a much closer competition (hint hint).
The Martin sounds like the body is a mile deep, whereas, the Taylor sounds very shallow. It's their trademark sounds! Cant go wrong with either. My personal preference from this vid is the Martin, w/o question!
Did a test on a martin D-16 recently and was blown away with the first strum. It is an insane guitar! Damned near bought it, but opted for a Gibson Les Paul Japan Limited edition instead. I think the D-16 is next tho. Check it out and hear it for yourself if you haven't already done so.
Martin sounds warmer. I had both. Sold them, but now retuning to Martin
I've listened to the comparison about half a dozen times now, and I have to give the nod to maple walnut ice cream over butter pecan. The rich, classical taste of maple walnut is clearly superior in form and function to the warmth and smoothness of butter pecan.
I ran across this channel when I searched for Taylor guitars, and you know what? As far as I know, Tony is the only person anywhere who'll do us the very simple service of comparing guitar tone right in front of us, side by side- two guitars, so we can actually hear how they compare. You know, instead of reading descriptions of their tone- which is useless. It's a great idea and I appreciate it, Tony. Now, then...off to rob a bank..
The Martin was much more pleasant to listen to, and by the end of the video, although I like brightness, I was beginning to get ear fatigue from the Taylor's sharp tinniness. If you're a singer-songwriter, you want the rich, smooth Martin backing you up.
The Taylor sounds like it's coming through a tube that accentuates the higher end of the midrange a little too much. The Martin has a far more "true" flat warm chorusy sounding tone. I would want my guitar to be flat in the studio because it's easier to EQ into a sound than it is to EQ parts out of it.
Actually, in terms of REAL EQ, Taylors are actually most of the times flatter than Martin
Besides, most of the sound engineers these days, at least the ones I personally know, prefer Taylor over Martin.
I have the D-16 e. Nice guitar.
Martin has a warmer fuller sound. Taylor is a little bright for my ear. Both are nice guitars though.
Beautiful guitars and beautiful playing
Martin for me.
The part of the video that I found most telling was when he was just strumming chords. The Martin sounded clear and full. The Taylor sounded too strong in the mids which muddled up the sound a bit
I like the ebony fretboard and bridge on the Taylor. I owned the D18 and traded it away and never have missed it. Good video.
Martin has much more balanced tone and is less harsh.
So Martin for me.
Actually, it's LESS balanced. Sitka tops are bright in nature.
I appreciate your reviews. It's amazing the different tones that are out there. You really need to understand what you want, and the price range that you are looking in. I leaned towards the Martin. Seems like the harmonics were more even throughout, where the Talyor leaned a little more on the higher end brightness.
yup, verging on tinny.
honestly, it depends on what key he played in. One was better than the other in somethings.
Thanks for this review !
The D-16 sounds better to my ears, there is just that Richlite thing that annoys me a little to be true.
I would understand the use of this material on a cheaper guitar though.
Sylv ain your english is quite good but honest should be in place of true.
Philip Deppen Maybe check yours? I don’t see any errors. If you’re referring to the “your” that’s intentionally possessive. Like your english isn’t good. Your phone is ringing. You’re is meant to be used in place of you are. Like you’re a fucking idiot and you revealed it by thinking I misspelled correctly spelled words. Meaning those are words you regularly misspell. Turn autocorrect back on bud it might teach you something.
@@HeiTheDarkReaper Ha! Great comeback. He may have been referring to your use of of the word "English," which should have been capitalized. I'm not sure anymore, but back when I was a kid in school improper capitalization constituted a misspelled word on the test. It really doesn't matter here though. You and Philip Deppen both communicate wonderfully. A writer once said, "Language is the skin of thought." And that's the beauty of a forum such as this. We can truly convey our thoughts and feelings in a common meeting place populated by people who are passionate about Martin and Taylor guitars.
LOVE my DN3, the most balanced sound I own! Outplays my 85 D18 hands down!
I've played plenty of both & let's face it both have their own distinct sound. Some people like Taylor some people prefer Martin.
I always wished Taylor could make a guitar that sounds more like a D28, not going to happen
The taylor has that brighter taylor sound but it also surprised me with the low end it still had! the martin has that classic martin sound very very WARM! the taylor would definitely sound better if you were a solo artist or in a more contemporary band, but if you're in a folk band i would go with the martin because it wouldn't stick out. but i do have to say i still think the taylor 320, that has the tropical mahogany top, would sound better than this particular martin in my opinion. That's just because i love how Tropical mahogany and sapele sound when put on the same guitar!
But the Martin siunds fuller and sweeter, the taylor sounds louder but has a mid range tone that is not so pleasent.
Martin on this one. Big time
Strumming lightly (3:39)really shows the balance of the Martin. The Taylor leans toward a slightly more bottom and top tone with both being a little punchier. I had a 310 CE which I still miss. Shopping right now. Considering a Martin or a Larrivee' for something different than what I had.
Martin wins hands down!!!
agree
A couple years ago Alanis Morissette played a televised awards show. The man running front of house said she played a Taylor and there were 2 Martins onstage as well. He said the Taylor's are so bright and in this case ruining the high hats in the mix so they had to mute Alanis. Go figure. I like Martin.
I smell bullshit. The sound guy muting Alanis Friggin Morrisette?
If I was a Bluegrass guy, I'd pick the Martin. It's what my ears are used to hearing in that genre'.
Select D-16
I bought it.
Two great guitars to be fair, but for me the Martin D16 is such an underrated guitar its crazy. You really get a lot of punch and bass and the guitar feel great to play, like the whole thing is vibrating like crazy. That being said the Taylor is a very good option, if you prefer that kind of sound. Sounds great as well. In a band setting I might go for the Taylor, and Ive been a long time Martin purist. But Im always open for new sonic sensations.
The Martin wins for sound in my book. Perfectly balanced whereas the Taylor mid is dominant and tamps the highs and lows because. But ebony fingerboard? That's a better piece of wood to make contact with.
Just listening, the Martin seems to have a more balanced sound, the Taylor has more midrange wonk to it. Not bad, mind you, just not as clear and level as the Martin, which has a more natural sound. The Taylor sounds a bit colored in tone.
agreed. martin sounds smooth, warm, earthy, balanced and natural. taylor is more spicey, colored, resonant, a bit boomy, with better highs, but not necessary bad, some do like it. the chap who mentioned about the equalsier has a good point. i have a martin 16, but want a 414 as well.
Hi, those songs that you played were great for the demonstration. What are the titles?
The Taylor seemed a bit louder with a light twang while the Martin seemed more warm and smooth.
I think the Taylor is more balanced and clear. The Martin is more boomy and muted. Depends on what you like. I own a 310 and it is very versatile. It also has plenty of bass and I enjoy fingerstyle on it - enough that I sold my 314.
Hmmm, I wouldn't turn either Guitar down as far as ownership but I kinda like the tone of the Martin a bit better over the Taylor...Thanks for the comparison..
Martin just sounds how an acoustic should sound.
I like both :)
That's a close call which of these guitars is the winner. They both have the sound characteristics that Martin and Taylor are known for. I still prefer the Martin sound, but I do love the midrange of that Taylor. Maybe if I had the money I'd buy both of them, LOL.
I play D - 16 Martin
thanks for the demo. iv been enjoying them. i really like my martin D16 RGT. almost went with the mahogany model. however, the rosewood model just sounded the best to my ears that day. i say find a acoustic guitar you like, and spend more time playing.. if you do this.. i bet regardless of what brand you end up buying./ you spend a few hours a day with her you will make her sound as good as she is gonna ever sound. how can you not if are practicing more. i think i want a ceder top for my next acoustic. i really am digging ceder and how well it goes with finger picking. but all maple sounds good too. sigh, i guess its ok to just buy the martin and the taylor.. no problem then. laughs.never know what guitar may inspire you that day, so options are ok i think. rock on.
I've tried both in the store, quite similar in sound. then I played the d28. and ummm.. you know the rest
Martin wins on the Dred body style and sound, it's classic. Taylor has other designs that I do like, like the GA or 14 series, and the really big GO body they just came out with. I really like what Andy Taylor has done for them as far as design and sound. Both companies make great guitars.
Andy Taylor????
Prices
Martin D-16: $1,949
Taylor 310: $1,658
Mike Amar The d-16 is not 1,949. Even the rgt is only up to $1850. Which is alot considering what I got mine for 10 years ago new. But the GT is like 1650 or something now.
As of Nov. 2017, the Martin D-16GT retails for $1,499.99 EVERYWHERE in the USA...
D16GT is 1499
The Martin for me !
I like the Taylor more but it’s a very close comparison.
Has more clarity and has the projection to boot.
Both sound great , but Id have to give the win to martin for is warm balanced tone.
What genre of music is he playing at 02:18.??
I would like to see a comparison with a Larivee LV-o3RE .
This is now the second comparison I have to give to the Taylor. Its both deep and loud, which is what all bluegrass players want. I own 3 Martins now, but if I had to go and pick one of just those two to buy, I would take the Taylor without hesitation.
pickin4you No way
Yes way. The Martins I own are much better than the D-16. I have an HD-28 and a D-42. If I had to choose between my Martins and ANY Taylor, I would pick both of my Martins. I was just commenting on the two he compared in the video. Also, each guitar, even of the same make and model will sound different.
pickin4you I own a d-16rgt. No Taylor in its price range can touch it. And I don't hear this one touching the gt either. Is it my best Martin? Hell no. That would be my D Mahogany. It's a D-18ge with alpine Swiss top and bracing. Puts the GE away no problem. And all the wood is certified including the Honduras mahogany neck back and sides. No select wood neck here. And that guitar will bury any Taylor I've ever heard. All Taylor's. Oh BTW it was 1000 less the the GEs up to the point of being discontinued in 2013. Only 132 over 4 years made. A 5000 dollar Taylor can't touch it. And honestly I can't find one new Martin that does except the 18 authentic. Only one that edges it out. It's the rosewood lovers mahogany. Just a beast. Look into btw if you haven't heard of it. Might be the best kept secret in Martin history. Was called the D mahogany 09, in 2009 when it came out, and changed to D mahogany from 2010-2013. Only Martin ever made with Swiss alpine spruce bracing. They made almost no profit on it because they charged so little and it's higher quality then a GE. They also never changed the spec sheet to Golden era bracing, which it is. Including the side cloth strips. And that hurt the sales too. There are probably about 2 left in the world still new old stock for sale.
Anyway I'm sorry, back on point. The point is most Taylor's are good, and you don't find duds really, but none are amazing. None have that Martin wow when you find the one. That 16GT he's playing is while it's not top of the line still has that Martin soul, roundness, percussion and richness. Still has some wow factor even as an entry level. The Taylor once again sounds like all Taylor's. And that's not a good thing. Sounds 2 inches deep and the midrange gets all mashed together in brightness. Thee Martin sounds twice its size.
And with all due respect don't discount the 16s. I own 16rgt and also high end Martin's. Once that 16 opens up its a beast for the money. Mines 8 years old. Is it as good my brand new d mahogany? No. But not many things are, brand new. The d mahogany is just an amazing new out of the box sounding guitar (Swiss spruce) . However I'll put that aged 16 with replaced ivory saddle and nut against a new d28 any day and it will definitely hold its own against a new hd28. I'll never sell my 16rgt. It's a gray rosewood guitar and I put to main into it. They're good guitars and they nailed it with that hybrid bracing on that thing, whether it was on purpose or not. It Just works. Good talking to ya. Very surprised you prefer the Taylor here.
Fantastic demo and insightful comments from the exprienced. I decided on a Martin GT16 over a 414 that I was looking at...i think i prefer that warmer mids, soulful sound. i tried the 214CE and really love it, lively, but i think a bit bright for my taste of music. I heard the 414 would be better for singing along though...cant have everything in life all at once. if $ permits, i love to have a taylor one day as well. Altho a refined Lakewood would be a dream. thanks
whats the music at 02:30?
Taylor sounds brighter but the Martin has much more soul. I'd go the Martin hands down.
nice microphone
Excellent reviews of two fine guitars for us to hear! I prefer the Martin sound....and this one has it. I own one.
what does he start playing at 3:19?
Thanks for the review! Do you use the stock strings on these videos?
beautiful bottom end in the martin, thanks for sharing
Martin hands down. Big noticeable difference at 3:17, 3:32 and 3:37 with pick, Martin more rich and BALANCED low to high with definitely sweeter highs Taylor was more mid pronounced and thinner tone.
Question - which is easier to play?
That's not an easy question... The playability can vary with the setup of the guitar, what style you play and your experience level. Taylor's are known for their great playability though....
Very close in comparison? I don't believe ypu can can go wrong with either choice! Nice.
Both are amazing I think the Taylor had more clarity (as usual) but I like the Martin better look and sound, on this one.
not a Taylor fan but I like the clear high end and believe it would cut through the mix better. A Martin is furniture.
martin d-16!!!
Martin has fuller sound, both bass and treble, taylor sounds also nice with more mid range. Love them both.
The Martin sounds better to my ears in this test. But there was not a word about what strings were on each guitar - which makes as much difference as who made them.
The Martin sounds like an acoustic should sound.....a great 6 string acoustic instrument!!!
going through whatever recording configuration you're using and coming out of my trusty delta 66 and omni i/o and rokit 6 monitors, I sense more crispness and definition from the Martin and more pronounced mids but less crisp from the Taylor. If it's any indication of my personal preference (it is!), I own 2 Martins and no Taylors.
Smart man!! 👍
Both guitar are premium class,but that Martin has a soul...
Both sound great, I probably lean a little to martin but they are so close. Can you just give me either? hahha merry christmas?
Really hard to decide for finger-picking Taylor sounds better and stands out more but for strumming Martin wins with the mellow sound. =/
Am so happy I found this video!! I have a Martin D16GT, bought in NY from guitar center. Obviously sounds much better than the Taylor :) Now I’m wondering which guitar should I get for a step up...
I would want the Martin for playing Blues or rock, and the Taylor for playing country or bluegrass. Both sound great though.